Software Vault: The Diamond Collection/The Diamond Collection (Software Vault)(Digital Impact).ISO/cdr16/tc14_479.zip/TC14-479.TXT

Text File | 1995-01-22 | 20KB | 523 lines

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Klein)
Subject: Telephone Headset Source Wanted
Date: 31 Dec 1994 00:30:56 GMT
Organization: PICnet


I'm looking for a high quality, comfortable telephone headset.  I
don't like Radio Shack's.  Do you a suggestion?  Source?

Please E-Mail direct.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One of the best sources still remains
the
folks at Hello Direct. You can reach them for a copy of their catalog
by
calling 1-800-HI-HELLO.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (LogicaRsch)
Subject: Need Info on LD Marketing to College Students
Date: 30 Dec 1994 13:20:17 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (LogicaRsch)


I'm researching a magazine article on how the long distance companies
market their services to college students. You would be helping me
considerably by providing me with any of the following information:

o     The size (budget, number of employees) of AT&T's, MCI's or
Sprint's
student marketing departments.

o     Any recent promotions, giveaways or advertising targeting
college
students.

o     Any weird, frightening or amusing stories or incidents related
to
this subject.

You may e-mail or post an follow-up article. Thanks!

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Pinouts on RJ11 Plugs on Modems
Date: 30 Dec 1994 15:58:59 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Lockie Martin ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Can any of you telco people out there tell me the pinouts for the
RJ11
> plugs that appear on the back of most modems?

> |------|
> | 1234 |
> |      |
> |      |
> |-|  |-|

> ie which line performs what function? Is 3 the ringer?

Understand that I'm talking about U.S. standards.  There's not a lot
of differences throughout the world, but there are some.  And I'm
talking about USOC RJ-11.

The only two really important pins are the two in the middle.  The
outer two usually don't do anything, or are just passed on through.

One is tip or the green wire, and the other is ring or the red wire.
on the wall jack, they are normal, but on the other end of the cord,
they're reversed, so pin numbers depend on which end you're talking
about.

For the standard 2500 bell DTMF or touchtone phones the polarity
matters, but for most other newer equipment, the polarity isn't
important.

For the other USOC RJ-14, I believe it is, the outer two pins are a
second phone line.  Some of the cheaper phones don't even have the two
outer wire contacts in the jack.


John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs
Rancho Santiago Community College District
17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706
[e-mail]\[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sometimes the two outer pins also are
used for A/A1 supervision. I have an old 2400 baud US Robotics modem
with a dip switch which when set uses pins one and four to illuminate
the lamp on a six button phone nearby. Where less experienced and
knowledgeable people get confused frequently -- I am told this by
our local Radio Shack manager -- is on whether or not modems and other
telephone ancillary equipment, for example answering machines or
cordless phones, will work on 'line two'. As John Lundgren points out,
so much stuff these days does not even have the first and fourth pins
in the socket; only pins two and three are there. So we tell people
who ask, yes, your device (answering machine, cordless, modem or
whatever) *will* work on line two, but not as configured. Take your
pick, line one or line two -- and not to confuse the issue, but we
of course know it can be both if you use a switch that depends on
ringing current to throw its gate -- but for the general public, not
both. If you want it to operate on 'line two' in your house, here is
what you must do:  assuming all your jacks throughout your house are
wired in the standard way with red/green for pair one and yellow/black
for pair two, take the modular box serving your device -- and that
box only! -- and remove the cover. Swap out the red/green to the
terminals where the yellow/black currently terminate and vice-versa.
Now you will be feeding line two into your ancillary device, and
it won't know the difference. Its not so much the numbers one and two
as it is getting the phone feed to the two center pins on your device,
and typically the red/green into the cover of the wall box will do
just that.

Of course you get critters like me who pull these tricks, and then I
need to bring a multi-line phone out of the same wall box for whatever
reason via a duplex connector; I wind up having to open the phone
instrument and swap it back there <grin> else leave the phone line
buttons in backwards order also.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dave Van Allen)
Subject: Re: FM Subcarrier For Data Transmission
Date: 30 Dec 1994 18:29:59 GMT
Organization: You Tools Corporation/FASTNET


Bill McMullin ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> I am trying to learn more about using FM subcarrier technology to
>> deliver data.  What equipment is involved?  What does it cost?
What
>> (if any) regulations govern its use?

You're talking about using one of the two FM SCA channels to provide a
data broadcast on a specific frequency. In case you don't know, this
is a one-way channel -- out.  You cannot have full duplex. I assume
that you are aware of this.

The equipment involved from the radio station point of view is a SCA
generator, possible some additional monitoring equipment and perhaps
some antenna/RF chain tuning or filtering.  Most FM stations will be
very picky about adding SCA to their signal because it causes both
additional potential interference to the main channel and about a
8-10% loss in available modulation for the main channel.

Program directors hate SCA because they can't get the station as loud
as they can without it (based on the modulation reduction). General
managers look at SCA revenue carefully and will only do it if they
feel that they can get a good buck. A 'good buck' is determined by the
market size and what they station feels they can get. I have seen
SCA's costing 10K per month in some medium size markets.

The only regulations are technical, and shouldn't concern you. Your
issue will be convincing the station to do it, and at a resonable
cost.


Dave Van Allen - You Tools/FASTNET - [e-mail] - (610) 954-
5910
   -=-=-=- FASTNET(tm) PA/NJ/DE Internet 800-967-2233 -=-=-=-


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here in Chicago, we have several SCA's
operating on the sub-carriers of FM stations. Two or three that I am
familiar with are the Physician's News Network, a couple that carry
data transmissions, one that is 'elevator music' (Muzak) and another
one known as the Chicagoland Radio Information Service, aka CRIS. This
latter one is a newspaper reading service for persons who are visually
handicapped. If your physician certifies this, CRIS will give you a
free receiver. They are located on the sub-carrier of WBEZ, the public
radio outlet here.

The theory is you are not to listen to SCA unless you are 'authorized'
to do so, ie a subscriber. In that case, you get a crystal-controlled
single-station receiver from the organization or company to whose
service
you are subscribing, i.e. 'Muzak'.  Now-a-days, elevator music mostly
goes over wires, but there are still an over-the-air service here and
there operating. That's the theory. In practice however, people who
like
to putter around and experiment with radios build their own little SCA
receivers for the fun of it, and its not hard at all. Consider on your
(better quality) FM radio the little red light which goes on when the
station is broadcasting in stereo (which is all the time these days,
but don't laugh, years ago FM stations played monophonic recordings
from pre-1955 when that's all we had to listen to). So the little red
light would go off when the radio station played a monophonic
recording
and come on when the station played a stereophonic recording. That
little light is one of the station's sub-carrier frequencies.

So you go to Radio Shack, and get a cheesy little ten dollar pocket
radio with a switch on the back marked AM/FM/AFC. The AFC, or
automatic
frequency control, adjusts the radio as needed for drifting signals.
The thing is in larger cities with powerful FM stations, you don't
need
that, so we are gonna eliminate it and use that third position on the
switch for SCA. You also need to visit the components rack and get a
chip. So that I am not accused of teaching people how to build pirate
radios and/or non-type accepted equipment (hey, what would this world
be without lots of non-type accepted radio toys in the hands of
children
at heart to play with!), I shall be purposefully vague.  You might
look at the 555 chip and see it will do the job. Get a little tiny
socket to mount it in and a tiny little breadboard since it all has to
fit inside the radio.

Now when you get home, open the radio and look in there for the
product detector. Find out for yourself how far up or down off the
main channel is that little red light mentioned above. All the sub-
carrier frequencies are spaced apart from each other in the same way.
You get power to this little installation via the AM/FM/AFC switch
on the radio. When clicked into the AFC position once you are
finished,
instead of AM or FM, the radio becomes a *tunable* SCA unit. Whee!!!
Now you get to listen to Muzak free of charge instead of paying the
monthly subscription.

Well, its not quite as glamorous and exciting when finished as it
sounded when you were building (or rather, retrofitting an existing
radio) the unit. For one, why do you think the authorized SCA radios
use crystal control instead of a tuning dial?  Well, the signal is
so -- ahem -- piss poor due to the fact that the SCA is only at about
ten or fifteen percent modulation. The radio will drift constantly
off and on the main channel. You'll hear a constant 'wah wah wah wah'
noise in the background as the main channel modulation bleats at you.
If you are fairly close to the source then the signal will be better.
You must be very nimble at tuning, turning the dial *very* slowly and
eventually locking in the SCA you want to listen to. Even
professionally
built SCA tuners have problems with modulation bleedover from the main
channel if the 'regular' station is loud most of the time.

So let's say instead of building an SCA, you happen to find one
somewhere
else, maybe from the newspaper reading service for blind people or
what
have you. You decide to change the crystal inside to the one which
will
play Muzak instead. Gee, guess what?  There is no noise blanker or
silencer/squelch in the unit the blind people use. Their station talks
all day reading the newspapers. The unit built for the Muzak people
has
a gizmo inside to silence the speaker when the music stops playing
inbetween selections. So when one Lawrence Welk selection stops and
before the next one begins, the radio sits there and hisses at you.
Gee,
that never happens when riding in the elevator does it?  That's
because
if you were not so cheap and you paid Muzak their subscription fee
each
month they would give you a radio which silences itself inbetween the
songs ... dead silence. Same principle as above, just a couple more
circuits installed.

None the less you can have fun building an SCA receiver out of a
regular
radio and listening to it now and then, and its a pretty simple
project, albiet nothing to apply to the FCC for type-acceptance on
when finished.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Roberts)
Subject: Its Here Again! FCC/Modem Tax
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 17:15:00 GMT
Organization: The Great Escape - Gardena, CA - [phone]


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, I was not aware that this had
> come back again, and I strongly urge anyone reading this to be very
> careful in investigating it *before you send off any letters to
> anyone anywhere*.  It sounds like a replay of the same old crock
> we went through two or three years ago .. or was it five years ago?
> Come to think of it, is this the third or fourth time this thing
> has sprung up?    PAT]

It sounds like the same old crock because it IS the same old crock.
It's popped up two times in the last two months on BBS networks and
the
best thing for us to do is send messages indicating it is a hoax and
requesting the files be killed at the source.

The opinions expressed here are all mine - and I'm darn proud of them!
Bruce Roberts, [e-mail]

* RM 1.3 01036 * Sharewear (n.) -- Used clothing.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Like myself Bruce, you do not give
humble opinions.    PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (NoATT4Me)
Subject: Re: Its Here Again! FCC/Modem Tax
Date: 30 Dec 1994 16:05:24 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (NoATT4Me)


Actually in fairness to Mr. Goodman, it looks like he intended this
message to go to Pat.  I've seen this message posted on several BBS's
in my area as well so it is making its way around.


[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, he did not mark it 'not for
publication' and in any event, I think it does us good to air out
this thing once in awhile and re-emphasize the nonsense of it all.
PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Rob Boudrie)
Subject: Re: Flat Rate Cellular Phone Service
Date: 30 Dec 1994 14:34:22 -0500
Organization: Center for High Performance Computing of WPI


> Does anyone know why somebody hasn't started a flat rate cellular
> phone service?  I seems to me that this kind of business would do

Here in Eastern MA, I pay $35 for flat rate between 7pm and 7am,
holidays, and al day on wweekends.  They don't accept new subscribers
on that plan, but have a similar plan with flat rate hours starting at
9PM (and still having weekend flat rate).

> really well, since the users wouldn't have to pay air time.

50 cent a gallon gasoline would go over really well, since drivers
wouldn't have to pay a lot for fuel.  Neither assertion establishes
that it is in the profit maximizing interests of the service provider
to offer such pricing though.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Portability of 800 Number When Bill Not Paid
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 22:32:31 GMT
Organization: scruz-net


> I want to switch 800 carriers, away from a carrier with whom I have
a
> billing dispute.

> Is there any provision in FCC regs that allows the old carrier to
> refuse to release the number to teh new carrier, i.e., to deny
> portability to a new carrier in the case of an unpaid bill?

Robert,

I'm now in process of negotiating such a dispute with one of our
client's former 800 carrier. When we put in the resporg to switch to a
new carrier, they sat on it for months. We simply told our client not
to pay the bills as they came. After four months, and some calls to
the
right people in the FCC, they finally released it. Of course, we soon,
thereafter, recieved a letter from their collection agency. We wrote a
letter back stating the violations and refused to pay. They have since
offered to discount the amount by 25%, but we are still refusing to
pay because it would cost them more to fight it in court, where they
stand a good chance of losing anyway.


Kevin T. Smith

TeleSource U.S.A.     Silicon Valley, California
[phone] voice   b(408) 247-1070 fax
[e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Rupes)
Subject: Re: Buying GSM-Phones Abroad - a Comment
Date: 30 Dec 1994 19:12:01 -0500
Organization: Concentric Research Corporation


[e-mail] (Sean Leviseur) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail].
> Unisys.com> wrote:

>> In some countries GSM service providers subsidize the phones:  you
can
>> buy your phone at a very cheap price but at the same time you have
to
>> sign a contract with the service provider -- and they charge you
extra
>> for a year or two.

> In the UK the price doesn't change from one year to the next. I
cannot
> really see why it isn't a good idea to get a new phone every year
and
> to sell the old one. If there is a subsidy you may was well take it
:-)

Because the subsidy is paid by the operator. You might end up with two
subscriptions and two sets of monthly charges -- which WOULDN'T make
much sense ...

More pragmatically, one of the nice things of GSM is the SIM. What is
the point of having to get a new number every year -- a hassle telling
everyone ...

Finally, whats the point? Even subsidized a new phone is expensive. Do
you really want to shell out a few hundred quid every year just to
have the newest -- and the satisfaction of getting 'a bargain'?


Rupert

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ed Goldgehn)
Subject: Re: ISDN Internet Access
Date: 31 Dec 1994 00:34:54 GMT
Organization: The INTERNET Connection, LLC


As a good friend and associate likes to say:

 IT'S THE BANDWIDTH, STUPID!

[For those that are US politics impaired, any association with the
U.S.
1992 Presidential Campaign is fully intended.]


Ed Goldgehn

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 13:51:53 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Kelly Breit)
Subject: Re: TIA-Telecom Industry Association


Try the following contact information for the TIA:

Joseph Grimes
Director of Member Relations
Telecommunications Industry Association
2001 Pennsylvania Ave Northwest, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20006-1813
202-457-5430 Direct   202-457-5442 Main
202-457-4939 Fax

Good Luck!


Kelly Breit

International Telecommunications Engineering, Inc.
<Telecommunications Consultants>
6009 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 103 * Minneapolis, MN 55416-1623
612-542-9440 * 612-542-9341 Fax * Internet: [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Rupes)
Subject: Re: TIA-Telecom Industry Association
Date: 30 Dec 1994 19:08:20 -0500
Organization: Concentric Research Corporation


[e-mail] (Steve Evans) writes:

> Does anyone have a better phone number for the TIA-Telecom Industry
> Association?  The phone number is "disconnected" per the phone co.
> Maybe they changed their name, or address, or both, or?  I think it
> was valid within the last year. Thanks!

> Telecom Industry Association
> 2500 Wilson Blvd   Suite 300
> Arlington, VA 22201
> Tel: [phone]   (NOT!)

I was trying to ring them in late Dec. They have moved, but the new
phone system will not operational until -- I think -- Jan 6th.

I'm not sure, but that *looks* like the new, as yet not operational
number.  The old ú is still connected to voicemail -- I left a
message and got a call back later that day.

If you want I can post the numbers (new and old) next week when I get
back to work.


Rupert Baines


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I received a call from someone Friday
morning who said the same thing as Mr. Baines. I forget who called.
The thing is, the number shown above will be operational again
sometime
around the first week in January when the move is completed.  PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #479
******************************